Here is my craptastiv understanding of it.
Harry said he had "just learned" of something, so he could still sue even though the time limit had passed. Time limits exist because memories and evidence fade.
Evidently, the defendant asked for records in discovery that have to do with this limit. If Harry lied about when he "discovered" the issue, he could be in deep shit. It's interesting because something is making the defendant's counsel think he is lying. I wonder if they have the other party's copy already.
BUT I AM PROBABLY WRONG. đ€Ł
I'll explain
Piers Morgan hacked your phone in 1996. But you didn't find out until today. 2024
In this type of crime, the time limit does not run from when the event occurred, but from when you found out that it occurred. Because that is when your right of action before a court arises.
So, you have until 2029 to sue, 5 years.
After those five years, Piers Morgan can go to court to request that the case be barred. Why not before? Because Morgan committed the crime, and if he asked for the statute of limitations he would have to say "I committed the crime of hacking to ScoogyShoes." That does not happen. That would be equivalent to condoning fraud. And that doesn't happen.
Let's go with Harry.
In 2011 the News of the World case explodes... and it explodes because William, Harry's brother, sues the newspaper when he discovers that he was being spied on. And after an investigation, it is discovered that William, Kate and Harry have been hacked.
Harry then had since 2011 to sue. Until 2016.
What does Harry allege? That he wanted to sue, but they prevented him from doing so. In other words, in his case there was coercion to prevent him from suing. And if that doesn't help, Harry has alleged "continued offence." In other words, the practice of hacking and piracy did not end in 2013, but rather continued over time, he wanted to extend it until 2019, which means that he could have sued until now, 2024. But since he sued in 2019 , the prescription was interrupted.
What does The Sun say? Well, let Harry prove that he couldn't sue before 2016. Evidence, not his word. That is, documents, writings, something tangible that shows that Harry could not sue before 2016.
Harry can't seem to prove it.
The other aspect that someone reminded me of is that Harry claimed that he couldn't sue because there was a secret agreement between the newspaper and the BRF not to sue in exchange for a settlement that William got. The Sun seems to have struck a blow by having requested documents from Palace, which they gave them, in this regard.
I'm seeing that The Sun wants blood. I was surprised by the turn that Palace handed over documents. And Harry is having trouble backing up his paranoia and his story about why he didn't sue.
Excellent description, although your last paragraph: if the palace had evidence, it's the moral and legal obligation to provide it. They're not in this fight, they are simply a witness (essentially) providing a form of testimony.
If Harry expected protection from the institution he's been trying to tear down, he's dumber than I give him credit for.
I also read that he was suing about a much smaller number of incidents (13? 14?) than William who was suing over 135 or so - against both himself and Catherine. He was awarded 1.1 million which he donated to Invictus. Harry was offered something like 400K but turned it down believing he deserved more. The Ginger Whinger is always on brand.
Just a quibble: we donât know for sure what Wm did with the 1m pounds. Itâs a fact that the then Cambridges gave a million pounds to seed Invictus around the same general years timeframe
Found it
https://archive.ph/2023.04.26-001737/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/25/prince-harry-william-kate-media-coronation/
The firm represented both brothers in their phone hacking claim until 2019 when, by his own admission, Harry became frustrated with the slow progress and decided to go his own way with a new solicitor.
Along the search journey I stumbled across some pieces from January 2020. Honestly fascinating to see how they were seen then in the media vs how they are now. Night and day
Iâm pretty sure her legs slammed shut as soon as she got that ring in her finger. They probably open for business for others but are always closed & bolted shut whenever Prince not so smart wants a visit.
If the documents can prove that Harry knew and could have sued before 2016, do you think it would only result in his case being dismissed, or could this open other cans of worms, including a counter suit by the Sun and Mail?
It doesnt sound like there was a secret agreement but more than H either wasnt interested in the topic at the time or just didnt bother reading his emails/correspondence at that time. The palace having to provide a ton of documents on this must be really irksome as it is never clear if something will get released publicly abd twisted to show the workings of the RF in a bad way.
Can you imagine the uprising if the palace had refused to turn.over paperwork legally requested in order to help Harry screw the courts?Â
I really don't think there was even a question about that.
Thank you for your great explanation. I too wasnât sure what the big deal was, but now that youâve explained it in such great detail, Iâll get the popcorn ready đż
You were surprised that the palace handed over the documents? Can you expand on that? Shouldnât they have complied with the request? Do you think this shows that the palace has opted to not shield Harry?
They didn't give them to the courts, it was to H at the time of Megxit. It must contain stuff about bullying accusations, and is probably how madam wrote 25 pages in response.
>Thanks so much. Very illuminating explanation.
>
>"I was surprised by the turn that Palace handed over documents." I wasn't aware of this and it is surprising and seems significant as it looks like they are washing their hands of Harry.
Thank you So much for this. It wasn't clear to me what was going on by all the articles coming out. Now I get it. I think the Palace didn't have a choice but to submit documents to the courts.
So basically they court wants to see drafts of his book, along with conversations with his ghost writer, so they could see when discussions about hacking came up.
At this point, I think The Sun wants to nail his backside to the wall. They are probably so over it and are no longer going to appease him. They may certainly be calling his bluff, but I really think they have something. They are pretty specific, without giving too much detail, regarding what specifically is amiss.
ETA:. I hope it's making him squirm with his paranoia. Wouldn't have to be paranoid if you were honest moron.
If it turns out there is proof Harry lied, I hope the UK courts FINALLY declare him a vexatious litigant and put an end to all these baseless lawsuits!
I thought it was essentially proven he lied in the last case. The judge said to him something like, you had a case going that you dropped so obviously you were aware of the hacking. Now H has gone and destroyed documents that allegedly prove this. I think in one case he lied and said he didn't know and in a different one made up the Secret Agreement bs. He's fooked
If Harry gets his way over this kind of time tabling dispute it will open a never ending can of worms for the Press.
"Hacked Off" are using him as a wedge because of the favouritism the Courts are giving to his royal title. They aren't stupid but Harry is....he might score a few points against the Press but his public image is going down the pan.
Harry is a victim of his own desires.
Oh, I hope not! I hadn't thought of that. I think they teach lawyers not to ask questions they don't already know the answer to so I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they already have what they're looking for.
OMG this is getting so good!
You're right. I asked my BIL, who is a lawyer. That is the rule of thumb to not ask questions you don't already know the answer to.They've got the goods.Time to pay the piper H.đœ
Thatâs not necessarily the case. In cross/direct examination, yes. In discovery you ask for anything and everything you can think of and hope that the information/record exists.Â
This is true. Youâd be surprised by how many covert whistle blowers back channel info to opposing counsel when the defendant is loathsome. This happens in auditing quite a bit as well. A lower level staffer may tip us off to sketchy (or blatantly illegal) activity. Either because we donât want to expose them to help them avoid retribution, or because the tip doesnât come with rock hard evidence, if the whistle blower is deemed credible, requests may suddenly appear for the highly damaging data. Iâve seen some dirty dealers still try to deceive even in federal court. Some believe they are entitled to deceive. It doesnât work out well.
These are sometimes referred to as parallel investigations (not the same as the medical term). Itâs when we know the outcome beforehand then structure questions and work papers to prove the pre-known result. Itâs not uncommon, but it relies on a small minority willing to do the right thing.
eta grammar error
My question to this is how did someone find out about these two missing encrypted hard drives? They were not produced until the final minute so who 1. Knew they still existed, and 2. The locations (his US lawyers office & his LA home). Is there a whistleblower somewhere in Henryâs circle?
The whole thing is really confusing but I think the lawyers for NGN are making a "claim." I don't think it has actually been proven that Harry destroyed evidence.
Regardless, the optics just look bad.
100% correct. Everyone of my friends and family know this trait. Â
My BF would tell a friend "if she asks you to repeat something, run and don't stop. She knows the answer and is coming in for the kill" ie I want to see if the person is going to lie to my face.
The stupidest part about this entire thing is that he owns 2 entire hard drives full of this crap. How much has he been leaking? How much has be had influence in changing?
Hereâs timeline **proof that Harry met his lawyer Sherbourne coincidentally via Elton** when the phone hacking case reignited.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1b3zekt/some_background_on_how_harry_met_his_lawyer/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Everything this nearly 40 year old overgrown toddler does is performative and underhanded. That said, with every stupid stunt he tries to pull, it makes me wonder how all this will backfire, and I'm never disappointed.
He is not bright enough. Heâs bitten off more than he can chew. Weâve all benn there. The difference is we did this lapse in judgment in our teens or twenties.
Harry still doesnât know his limitations.
This. Heâs not really equipped to be left to his own devices with his own grown up life. Iâd love to say I think heâs starting to realise this hence the stories about the move back to the UK but I have no faith in this man at all so we can safely assume itâs all about money. Harryâs brain capacity aside, itâs almost as though his life was a bit better before he left the palace isnât it⊠where he had people and policies to protect him and the rest of us from his stupid actions.
Ah well. You made your bed, now lie in it, H.
Heâs spectacularly stupid, and was protected to an astonishing degree from that. The minute those two decided to barge out in a huff, was the very same moment the protective apparatus surrounding him started to be dismantled.
Forks in the road, and all thatâŠ
And even though his wife was VILE to staff they bent over backwards to accommodate the odious pair. They actually believed that they were bigger than the royal family so threw their weight around and stormed out. Like bratty children they pointed the finger and played the blame game. Pointing fingers and accusations of racism.
Just like he was talked into marriage and a life time of petty self perceived slights.
Dim Harry couldnât find his way out of a paper bag. Heâs always led.
In a nutshell: One of the issues that will be brought up at next yearâs trial against NGN newspapers is whether Harry knew of alleged hacking into his devices before 2013. If he knew of the hacking up until that point, then the case will be dismissed for being filed past the statute of limitations (date by which you can file a case. There is a question about how that timeframe should be calculated. As it stands, Harry is late in filing part of the case, but heâs arguing that he couldnât file the case timely because he learned of the alleged hacks after the statute of limitations had passed.)
Currently, the case is in the disclosure phase (discovery in US law). In order to figure out if Harry knew of the alleged hacking, the newspaper is asking him to search his electronic devices and emails for this information, during the relevant time period. (The parties agree on search terms like âphone hackingâ or âleaksâ and Harryâs legal team should plug those words into the search function of the device or email. They would then see if the results are relevant and would be required to turn over the information to the newspapers).
Harry claimed that âno topic was off limitsâ with his ghostwriter. As a result. The newspapers want to search the messages to see if the hacking was discussed and whether the timeline matches up with the existing statute of limitations. Basically, did Harry lie in claiming that he learned of the alleged hacks after 2013? Harry supposedly used an encrypted platform to speak with the writer and those messages shouldnât exist (though I would be curious to know whatâs kept on the servers).
Rehash Diana's death for 80 years and his personal trauma. Please send your pity check to PO Box 666, Montecito, CA 90666. Meghan needs a new set of teeth. /s
I'd like to confess 35 years ago I got a hang nail and it hurt really badly. I am still hurting over it, I am forcing you all to listen to my tale of woe (or should that be toe?)
The app he used with his ghost writer was Signal. The server only initiates the handshake between the two parties and then everything is P2P, which is why itâs marketed a secure messaging platform beyond just end to end encryption. So unless they subpoena one of the parties and they have kept the messages, there is no copy of the messages on any servers.
Yeah, I'm sure that ghost writer knows first hand how shady and what a liar Harry is, he needs to keep the receipts because Harry could sue him saying he never said whatever was published in the book.
He'd be a fool not to. Even as screenshots. Which is what I do though with modern software that's risky, unless kept on a pen drive in a secure bank vault.
He must have shared some of his evidence provided by Harry with the publisher's legal team. The legal team would also want proof maintained I expect, in case there was a legal challenge. You can't imagine Bowers not having evidence in reserve for backing up his books.
The other thing about all this. I call b/s on 130 hours to search the 35,000 emails, if the result was only a few relevant ones to the case. I can write a script in a minute that searches emails and grades results - if I was still a professional in IT, I'd keep those scripts in my toolbox ready to add key words or phrases. Even my iMac will search my 10,000 photos/screenshots etc for relevant terms or words and give you results in seconds.
Discovery is a big thing in the US. Dedicated software exists and I imagine any law firm worth their salt that deals with prestigious clients has specialists on tap or end of a phone to assist.
So he said he couldnt sue in the time frame because he wasnt aware - whereas the rest of the palace was aware? And he did become aware during the time of writing Spare so what was that moment he became aware and what was the trigger. Potentially Moehringer can get on stand. Sounds like H doesnt communicate well with his lawyers - the client from hell. Interesting!
I suspect that NGN wants to avoid dragging JRM into the case because heâs located in the US (harder to get him to participate, but not impossible) and that he might conveniently forget certain details.
Nothing in his whine fest wasnât predictable. The standard grievances from a weak, insufferable, spoiled little boy. đŠ didnât need the Daily Mail to leak it to me.
This one is regarding The Sun (NGN) not the Mail (edit: see below comments). My understanding of it is that NGN is saying that because of what Harry is alleging happened many years ago, the lawsuit was filed way too late thus should be dismissed. Harry's lawyer has claimed that it should not be dismissed because H didn't know stuff then that he has found out more recently. But that contradicts claims he made in Spare that he *did* know about what he alleged several years ago, but the palace wouldn't allow him to sue back then. So NGN is requesting to see texts/emails H had with the palace + w/ his ghostwriter, but they have all been erased/destroyed.
He has already published his excuses in his book. His memory is allegedly his memory and curates as it chooses, and there is just as much truth in his memories as in âso-called objective factsâ - even if he remembers the same occasion in two entirely different and conflicting ways, neither of which align with the objective facts everyone else remembers.
In reality, it also refers to the Mail. The Mail is also sued for the same reasons, in the same period of time.
The Mirror couldn't escape because the Mirror partly compensated Harry for what happened to the News of the World. But Harry now finds himself with The Sun and the Mail, which had a less active role than the News, so if The Sun manages to get the case barred, the Mail has a chance of achieving the same.
I really donât like The Scum/Sun newspaper, but in this instance I hope they win. H needs to learn a lesson about not always getting his own way from someone other than the government or BRF.
No, he's trying to pretend he hasn't known about the phone hacking since 2011 - which is what his entire case/s were based upon - the fact that he didn't know until recently. The little liar with his pants on fire has just been caught out, and I hope his other court cases get another look at too!
So even if Hâs emails are deleted from back in the day, I am sure the RF have emails which show H was informed. I expect they avoid providing anything here unless specifically asked.
Even back then, this numpty didnât want a quiet settlement. He wanted a huge victim pantomime. Heâs an irredeemable clown, and mistakes it for substance.
Methinks this is how Harry got by all his life. he lied, he threw tantrums, he gaslighted his family and they gave in to him-every single time. Especially the late Queen-who also gave in to Andrew. Like they say in America-there is a new sherriff in town-new King. For the first time, the bRF is not catering to him and taking care of his messes and making him appear as a nice , fun loving Prince.
He is doing what he has always done-just with everyone else-now that the bRF won't speak or take care of his messes. And it is backfiring spectacularly.
HMTLQ was an incredible woman, but from everything Iâve read, one of the consistencies about her was that she did not handle conflict well. (My husband is like this.) Charles was cut from the same cloth, but his first marriage is likely to have changed him.
Charles has happily engaged in conflict most of his life with vested interests in areas such as architectural heritage, sustainable farming and environmental protection. I donât think anyone could argue that he was conflict-averse. He suffered media scolding and public mockery for his determination to stand up for what he believed was right, however unpopular that was with the establishment. I donât think it is about avoiding conflict out of fear, but like his mother, he places a high value on respect, loyalty, trust, and keeping your word once given.
In their world, there is an expectation that private disputes are resolved in a civilised way between people acting rationally and respectfully. Once a compromise or an agreement is reached, there is an expectation that both sides will adhere to it and that one side wonât then try to stab the other in the back. Perhaps that is an attitude born out of the long and bloody history of the monarchy when family members actually did regularly kill their rivals and negotiated truces were a survival mechanism.
Possibly before Meghan, Harry would have also respected this creed, but as far as she is concerned, there is no such thing as win-win. In her world-view, âgood guys finish lastâ and winning means that one side (hers) gets everything they wanted and everyone else needs to lose. She was never going to honour any agreement that did not give her everything she demanded, no matter how objectively reasonable and fair that agreement may have been.
Yes, it was PPâs role to âhandle the familyâ. After he retired things started to slide. Iâd like to think MM would never have had a chance when he was on top of his game and before he passed away
The RF swept so much dirt under the rug you could trip over the bulge. A lot of what came out in Spare, by his own dumb admission, I am sure was hushed up. His brutish behavor towards the boarding school matron, or having sex behind a pub with a girl who amounted to a member of the staff, for example.
Basically the written texts will prove that Harry knew about the Levinson Enquiry. Which brings it back to being past the date these charges could be brought.
Yes⊠the judge is attempting to determine if Harry made reasonable attempts to seek justice within the timeframe. The Sun NGN says that they would like to see Harry emails to his private secretary (I forget the name now). Harry says, I have nothing pre2016 (Meghan was on the scene but this point). The Sun say⊠well lets see initial manuscripts of Spare outlining this time period⊠Harry has destroyed the early copies
Itâs a joke as H lived with William while this was going on. But it canât keep being ignored. And the knock on effect with Sherbourne and Shillings is a bonus
Itâs a different excuse each time: secret deal behind his back, prevented from suing. My understanding is he was fully informed every step of the way but not interested.
I think it was more, âMy Evil Brother Willy and his minions told me not to sue, but he settled for more money than I was offered.â
(Never mind that he donated that money to Invictus.)
What happened was heinous. Not one should be hacked like that, but they had their day in court. They settled, the settlment was paid out, and spent!
Im no friend of the skeezy side of the media, but this is ridiculous.
I wonder if theyre using this case to set a legal precendent. The law depends heavily on this principle, sometimes it feels like cases are allowed to run their course despite obvious grounds for dismissal... I wonder if this is one of those.
Pure speculation.
Harry and Hugh Grant wanted that, to set a legal precedent. They wanted to transform the press, and all that stuff. But Grant realized that his battle was going to cost him 10 million pounds so he dropped out. Not Harry, but his case is not on good footing at all.
Theyâre behind the game. The UK press was transformed in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry (2011-12). It may still have some sleazy operators (Meghan should know - thatâs what she relies on to publish her leaks) but it is radically different from what it was like before the Leveson Inquiry. Harry is dreaming about being a dragon-slayer in a battle where the dragon has already been vanquished and tamed, and everyone has gone home.
Leveson changed everything about UK Press practices. Haz is trying to revive decades-old grievances that no longer apply for his own self-glorification, and âŠ*security*. Everything he does is an exercise in masturbatory rage at his inadequacies.
It's a classic example of the proverb, "Two wrongs don't make a right" but the current environment encourages people like Harry to believe that , "Payback is paramount". It's a scorched earth attitude .
Question for those familiar with the law and titles.
If he is caught with lying to the UK courts, destroying evidence, could Parliament have a case to remove titles?
Megsy was still protected when she was called out (which I hope those people involved are kicking themselves).
Behavior unbecoming of a royal? Title holder? Especially because it was a gift, not a hereditary title.
I could just be over analyzing.
Hereâs Saturdayâs Sun from the paper itself
https://preview.redd.it/sx0dbyhgs89d1.jpeg?width=2162&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f31e8c4e5105f252e98dd818d1d01f4823bafccf
One of the issues in the case, IIRC, was how long after the alleged hacking incidents the lawsuit was filed. If I was accused of doing something on this night 20 years ago, I would have trouble proving where I was after 20 years. Itâs why statutes of limitations exist. Harry had to claim he wasnât fully aware of the hacking scandal at the time it was daily news, because if he knew about it then, he should have filed suit sooner.
Itâs possible that something in an early draft of his book or messages sent to the ghostwriter could reveal that he was aware sooner than he now claims. But the early drafts and messages have all disappeared, according to his legal team. The paperâs legal team doesnât fully buy into his theory (itâs their job to fight however they can in court) and want an explanation for why potentially relevant information that was also crucial to writing his book has disappeared.
ETA: itâs probably not a crime, unless it can be shown he intentionally hid the information or deleted it specifically to avoid having it show up in court. Iâm not a lawyer, or a Brit, so I could easily be wrong.
It depends on the crimes. Because if you are accused of having killed someone and you have been free for 20 years, but now you are accused of being guilty, in many countries there is no statute of limitations for that situation.
In this case of piracy, the statute of limitations does not run from when the incident occurred, it runs from when you found out. If your phone was hacked 20 years ago, but you found out today, you have until 2029 to sue. 5 years, general rule of prescription. How you prove that this happened is another story, but the rule is that from the moment you find out about the occurrence of the event is when the statute of limitations begins.
Harry has not strictly speaking committed a crime. He has not committed it because they are delivering documents, nothing more. The judge has not yet considered which of all the documents will actually be considered evidence. Be careful, proof is not everything you provide, but everything that is related to the substantial, relevant and controversial fact. A document in which Harry speaks ill of William is not evidence, it is only evidence if William had told Harry "Harry, my lawyer will contact you to sue News of the World" and that was a message from 2011.
Harry has not committed a crime, although he is doing really irregular things.
Can the case be thrown out / dismissed if no evidence provided ? Could be very costly as he will have to pay both sides costs if is deemed as wasting everyoneâs time and money. Could this case bankrupt him?
Has the ghostwriter been questioned? If I were him, I would have saved everything! Harry is known for being a lying prick. I would have saved everything to cover my own ass.
If there was an expectation that that folly of a memoir was going to be released as a paperback (which all parties likely believed at the time) no one would delete the pertinent information.
Of course he intentionally destroyed it. Whatâs in those will destroy HIM. And you can absolutely go to jail/prison for this. Itâs a very serious crime.
It's because of his book Spare. Their private conversations were all recorded. Harry has copies of the recordings. The ghostwriter is being asked about these recording that he gave to Harry, which would be full of dates and times. Ghostwriter is not lying to lawyers. Royal Rouge just did a live about this last night.
I'm a bit confused too it's hard to know which lawsuit is which. Â
What I don't understand is is Harry trying to say that the institution banned him from suing during the time frame? Â
I don't see how they could have actually banned him. I think they strongly advised him not to sue but presumably he would have had to sign something if he was being included in a 'secret' deal. Is he claiming that the institution forged his signature or did he sign because he thought it was the right thing to do at the time but has now 'forgotten' or didn't understand what he was signing?Â
The institution did not stop Meghan from suing for copyright wrt he letter to her father. They were still in the fold when they launched the case against the daily mail.
I'm wondering if he's just decided that he feels he was prevented and that's all the evidence he requires.
Can we the public, sue Harry for being mind numbingly stupid and subjecting us to this shit show? Someone needs to start throwing tomatoes at these two idiots, they just don't learn...
Iâm still confused! How would the messages between H and the ghostwriter prove anything? I get it if Harry wrote âso then in 2013 I found out everything about the hacking but donât put that in the book because Iâm still suing themâ. But surely the messages arenât going to reference how much H knew and when? Sorry for being dense!Â
He only needed to write about him being the victim of media hacking and how it made him feel in 2013. The point is that Harry denies knowledge prior to 2019. Ideal for NGN would be, if Harry told the ghostwriter to scrap a chapter because his lawyers told him so. But later isn't necessary.
Both sides need to enter all evidence prior to the trial. If NEW evidence comes, they need to show the judge how they just found out the evidence. Otherwise, they have an advantage over the other side, because the other side now has only a little time to prepare but the side that showed the new evidence has had longer (if they lied and they really DID know before).
So, Harry and his lawyers are pretending they JUST found out this new evidence. However, in a deleted draft of Spare, it shows he knew back in 2013, meaning that the statute of limitations is out on it; he can't give the excuse, "Oh I just found out."
Clearly, Harry really didn't get as many sausages as William! Harry did not get enough protein to his growing brain, and the last several years are clear evidence that his brain is stunted.
Amazing breakdown of harry's legal quagmire here. Thank you and I hope they throw the book at this vexatious twit and his helpers. Speaking of which, Vintage Read has just posted a really interesting interview with Andrew Lownie on the RF's (or their guardians') habit of destroying documents even when supposedly accessible to the public. Obviously, this little foible is not only the prerogative of the RF, the UK government and other countries do it too but maybe that's why harry thinks he can get away with it. I do hope the judge doesn't buckle under pressure.
Here is my craptastiv understanding of it. Harry said he had "just learned" of something, so he could still sue even though the time limit had passed. Time limits exist because memories and evidence fade. Evidently, the defendant asked for records in discovery that have to do with this limit. If Harry lied about when he "discovered" the issue, he could be in deep shit. It's interesting because something is making the defendant's counsel think he is lying. I wonder if they have the other party's copy already. BUT I AM PROBABLY WRONG. đ€Ł
I'll explain Piers Morgan hacked your phone in 1996. But you didn't find out until today. 2024 In this type of crime, the time limit does not run from when the event occurred, but from when you found out that it occurred. Because that is when your right of action before a court arises. So, you have until 2029 to sue, 5 years. After those five years, Piers Morgan can go to court to request that the case be barred. Why not before? Because Morgan committed the crime, and if he asked for the statute of limitations he would have to say "I committed the crime of hacking to ScoogyShoes." That does not happen. That would be equivalent to condoning fraud. And that doesn't happen. Let's go with Harry. In 2011 the News of the World case explodes... and it explodes because William, Harry's brother, sues the newspaper when he discovers that he was being spied on. And after an investigation, it is discovered that William, Kate and Harry have been hacked. Harry then had since 2011 to sue. Until 2016. What does Harry allege? That he wanted to sue, but they prevented him from doing so. In other words, in his case there was coercion to prevent him from suing. And if that doesn't help, Harry has alleged "continued offence." In other words, the practice of hacking and piracy did not end in 2013, but rather continued over time, he wanted to extend it until 2019, which means that he could have sued until now, 2024. But since he sued in 2019 , the prescription was interrupted. What does The Sun say? Well, let Harry prove that he couldn't sue before 2016. Evidence, not his word. That is, documents, writings, something tangible that shows that Harry could not sue before 2016. Harry can't seem to prove it. The other aspect that someone reminded me of is that Harry claimed that he couldn't sue because there was a secret agreement between the newspaper and the BRF not to sue in exchange for a settlement that William got. The Sun seems to have struck a blow by having requested documents from Palace, which they gave them, in this regard. I'm seeing that The Sun wants blood. I was surprised by the turn that Palace handed over documents. And Harry is having trouble backing up his paranoia and his story about why he didn't sue.
Excellent description, although your last paragraph: if the palace had evidence, it's the moral and legal obligation to provide it. They're not in this fight, they are simply a witness (essentially) providing a form of testimony. If Harry expected protection from the institution he's been trying to tear down, he's dumber than I give him credit for.
I'm sure I read something to the effect that H separated from William's case because he thought it was taking too long
I also read that he was suing about a much smaller number of incidents (13? 14?) than William who was suing over 135 or so - against both himself and Catherine. He was awarded 1.1 million which he donated to Invictus. Harry was offered something like 400K but turned it down believing he deserved more. The Ginger Whinger is always on brand.
Just another grudge against William! They even hacked his phone more than mine!
Just a quibble: we donât know for sure what Wm did with the 1m pounds. Itâs a fact that the then Cambridges gave a million pounds to seed Invictus around the same general years timeframe
This!
Sounds on brand for Harry
I remember that too but whether it was thus particular lawsuit or a similar one against another tabloidđ€·ââïžÂ
Found it https://archive.ph/2023.04.26-001737/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/25/prince-harry-william-kate-media-coronation/ The firm represented both brothers in their phone hacking claim until 2019 when, by his own admission, Harry became frustrated with the slow progress and decided to go his own way with a new solicitor.
đ it's hard to keep track of them all .TY
Along the search journey I stumbled across some pieces from January 2020. Honestly fascinating to see how they were seen then in the media vs how they are now. Night and day
And these two hard drives effectively prove that he knew in 2011. He's screwed lol, and not in the way he enjoys from megsy!
Winner, winner, (roast) chicken dinner!
You had to go and make it gross đ
And I love that for them! Although I will say I must go bleach my eyeballs/brain now. Thank you.
Lol I was having a lovely little read and bam assaulted with that mental image đ€Șđ€Șđ€Șđ€Ș
good point but damm where is the bleach need it for my brain now yuk
I am pretty sure he enjoys neither of those.
Iâm pretty sure her legs slammed shut as soon as she got that ring in her finger. They probably open for business for others but are always closed & bolted shut whenever Prince not so smart wants a visit.
If the documents can prove that Harry knew and could have sued before 2016, do you think it would only result in his case being dismissed, or could this open other cans of worms, including a counter suit by the Sun and Mail?
It doesnt sound like there was a secret agreement but more than H either wasnt interested in the topic at the time or just didnt bother reading his emails/correspondence at that time. The palace having to provide a ton of documents on this must be really irksome as it is never clear if something will get released publicly abd twisted to show the workings of the RF in a bad way.
If evidence shows he knew in 2011, would the court determined he's barred due to staute of limitations and SOL? (Sh8t outta luck)
Harry didn't do it. And if he did do it, he didn't mean to do it. /s
And if he did mean it, it wasnât that bad.
And if it was that bad it wasn't his fault...
It can't be his fault because his mom died when he was a kid.
And the defense rests.
This was very helpful!
Can you imagine the uprising if the palace had refused to turn.over paperwork legally requested in order to help Harry screw the courts? I really don't think there was even a question about that.
I expect they were more than willing to assist the Sun .
They gave H the docs after he left the RF. Not the court.
That's pretty much what I figured too.
They gave H documents in 2020. When he left for Megxit. Not the courts.
I read about this agreement sometime ago. I don't remember when or where. But William donated, I think all of the settlement to Ingriftus.
Yes. ÂŁ1M....
Thanks sinner for breaking this down.
Thank you for your great explanation. I too wasnât sure what the big deal was, but now that youâve explained it in such great detail, Iâll get the popcorn ready đż
You were surprised that the palace handed over the documents? Can you expand on that? Shouldnât they have complied with the request? Do you think this shows that the palace has opted to not shield Harry?
They didn't give them to the courts, it was to H at the time of Megxit. It must contain stuff about bullying accusations, and is probably how madam wrote 25 pages in response.
Great summary, very helpful. Do we know how or any details about the alleged coercion? That seems pretty pathetic to me.
Thankyou for making thus situation so much easier to understand! đ
>Thanks so much. Very illuminating explanation. > >"I was surprised by the turn that Palace handed over documents." I wasn't aware of this and it is surprising and seems significant as it looks like they are washing their hands of Harry.
Thanks for explaining! This is extremely helpful.
Thank you So much for this. It wasn't clear to me what was going on by all the articles coming out. Now I get it. I think the Palace didn't have a choice but to submit documents to the courts. So basically they court wants to see drafts of his book, along with conversations with his ghost writer, so they could see when discussions about hacking came up.
Do we know what the secret agreement with BRF stated?
Fab summary!
At this point, I think The Sun wants to nail his backside to the wall. They are probably so over it and are no longer going to appease him. They may certainly be calling his bluff, but I really think they have something. They are pretty specific, without giving too much detail, regarding what specifically is amiss. ETA:. I hope it's making him squirm with his paranoia. Wouldn't have to be paranoid if you were honest moron.
If it turns out there is proof Harry lied, I hope the UK courts FINALLY declare him a vexatious litigant and put an end to all these baseless lawsuits!
I thought it was essentially proven he lied in the last case. The judge said to him something like, you had a case going that you dropped so obviously you were aware of the hacking. Now H has gone and destroyed documents that allegedly prove this. I think in one case he lied and said he didn't know and in a different one made up the Secret Agreement bs. He's fooked
Yes! And make him pay! A LOT
If Harry gets his way over this kind of time tabling dispute it will open a never ending can of worms for the Press. "Hacked Off" are using him as a wedge because of the favouritism the Courts are giving to his royal title. They aren't stupid but Harry is....he might score a few points against the Press but his public image is going down the pan. Harry is a victim of his own desires.
>At this point, I think The Sun wants to nail his backside to the wall. 
I hope they are over it! I know I am!
Especially if heâs still getting stoned. That shit can make you triple paranoid.
Oh, I hope not! I hadn't thought of that. I think they teach lawyers not to ask questions they don't already know the answer to so I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they already have what they're looking for. OMG this is getting so good!
You're right. I asked my BIL, who is a lawyer. That is the rule of thumb to not ask questions you don't already know the answer to.They've got the goods.Time to pay the piper H.đœ
Thatâs not necessarily the case. In cross/direct examination, yes. In discovery you ask for anything and everything you can think of and hope that the information/record exists.Â
This is true. Youâd be surprised by how many covert whistle blowers back channel info to opposing counsel when the defendant is loathsome. This happens in auditing quite a bit as well. A lower level staffer may tip us off to sketchy (or blatantly illegal) activity. Either because we donât want to expose them to help them avoid retribution, or because the tip doesnât come with rock hard evidence, if the whistle blower is deemed credible, requests may suddenly appear for the highly damaging data. Iâve seen some dirty dealers still try to deceive even in federal court. Some believe they are entitled to deceive. It doesnât work out well. These are sometimes referred to as parallel investigations (not the same as the medical term). Itâs when we know the outcome beforehand then structure questions and work papers to prove the pre-known result. Itâs not uncommon, but it relies on a small minority willing to do the right thing. eta grammar error
It sounds like theyâre giving him a chance to come clean?
or inviting him to perjure himself further so he is then so deeply humiliated that he melts into the earth?
I think he's adapted like Megsy. He doesn't get embarrassed.
Fingers crossed!
My question to this is how did someone find out about these two missing encrypted hard drives? They were not produced until the final minute so who 1. Knew they still existed, and 2. The locations (his US lawyers office & his LA home). Is there a whistleblower somewhere in Henryâs circle?
Excellent points.
đ€đ€đ€đż
The whole thing is really confusing but I think the lawyers for NGN are making a "claim." I don't think it has actually been proven that Harry destroyed evidence. Regardless, the optics just look bad.
100% correct. Everyone of my friends and family know this trait.  My BF would tell a friend "if she asks you to repeat something, run and don't stop. She knows the answer and is coming in for the kill" ie I want to see if the person is going to lie to my face.
Yes exactly THIS!!
The stupidest part about this entire thing is that he owns 2 entire hard drives full of this crap. How much has he been leaking? How much has be had influence in changing?
Hereâs timeline **proof that Harry met his lawyer Sherbourne coincidentally via Elton** when the phone hacking case reignited. https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1b3zekt/some_background_on_how_harry_met_his_lawyer/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Everything this nearly 40 year old overgrown toddler does is performative and underhanded. That said, with every stupid stunt he tries to pull, it makes me wonder how all this will backfire, and I'm never disappointed.
He is not bright enough. Heâs bitten off more than he can chew. Weâve all benn there. The difference is we did this lapse in judgment in our teens or twenties. Harry still doesnât know his limitations.
This. Heâs not really equipped to be left to his own devices with his own grown up life. Iâd love to say I think heâs starting to realise this hence the stories about the move back to the UK but I have no faith in this man at all so we can safely assume itâs all about money. Harryâs brain capacity aside, itâs almost as though his life was a bit better before he left the palace isnât it⊠where he had people and policies to protect him and the rest of us from his stupid actions. Ah well. You made your bed, now lie in it, H.
Heâs spectacularly stupid, and was protected to an astonishing degree from that. The minute those two decided to barge out in a huff, was the very same moment the protective apparatus surrounding him started to be dismantled. Forks in the road, and all that⊠
And even though his wife was VILE to staff they bent over backwards to accommodate the odious pair. They actually believed that they were bigger than the royal family so threw their weight around and stormed out. Like bratty children they pointed the finger and played the blame game. Pointing fingers and accusations of racism.
Dim Harold was talked into these lawsuits by clever goaders.
Just like he was talked into marriage and a life time of petty self perceived slights. Dim Harry couldnât find his way out of a paper bag. Heâs always led.
 Just keep digging Harry.
Harry trying to blame the beloved Queen for this wasnât his best move. Iâm guessing this made it easier for the palace to cheerfully cooperate.
Yes âoh do come around to the Palace with your vans and collect the archive. You are most welcome.â
In a nutshell: One of the issues that will be brought up at next yearâs trial against NGN newspapers is whether Harry knew of alleged hacking into his devices before 2013. If he knew of the hacking up until that point, then the case will be dismissed for being filed past the statute of limitations (date by which you can file a case. There is a question about how that timeframe should be calculated. As it stands, Harry is late in filing part of the case, but heâs arguing that he couldnât file the case timely because he learned of the alleged hacks after the statute of limitations had passed.) Currently, the case is in the disclosure phase (discovery in US law). In order to figure out if Harry knew of the alleged hacking, the newspaper is asking him to search his electronic devices and emails for this information, during the relevant time period. (The parties agree on search terms like âphone hackingâ or âleaksâ and Harryâs legal team should plug those words into the search function of the device or email. They would then see if the results are relevant and would be required to turn over the information to the newspapers). Harry claimed that âno topic was off limitsâ with his ghostwriter. As a result. The newspapers want to search the messages to see if the hacking was discussed and whether the timeline matches up with the existing statute of limitations. Basically, did Harry lie in claiming that he learned of the alleged hacks after 2013? Harry supposedly used an encrypted platform to speak with the writer and those messages shouldnât exist (though I would be curious to know whatâs kept on the servers).
What a colossal loser to still be whining about hacking from 21 years ago.
Letâs face it. When Harryâs 90, he will still be whining about things that happened when he was 4.
Those damn sausages!!!
Rehash Diana's death for 80 years and his personal trauma. Please send your pity check to PO Box 666, Montecito, CA 90666. Meghan needs a new set of teeth. /s
I doubt he'll live that long. He doesn't look that healthy now and he's just about to hit 40.
âThose damn sausages! William got them all!â
And when M is 90, sheâll still be having âmiscarriagesâ.
I donât think Harry is healthy enough to live that long.
I doubt he will live that long
I mean... he still whines about mummy dearest from 25+ years ago too... seems to be a habit of his.
I'd like to confess 35 years ago I got a hang nail and it hurt really badly. I am still hurting over it, I am forcing you all to listen to my tale of woe (or should that be toe?)
And his dead mummy from 26 years ago...
Also, wouldnât it be wonderful if the communications were printed?
Ooooh yes serialised in the Sun :)
Theyâd be cringier than Brian Higginsâ texts to Karen R. Both men are losers.
Ooof!
The app he used with his ghost writer was Signal. The server only initiates the handshake between the two parties and then everything is P2P, which is why itâs marketed a secure messaging platform beyond just end to end encryption. So unless they subpoena one of the parties and they have kept the messages, there is no copy of the messages on any servers.
Even if haz destroyed them, ghost writer Mohringer kept his copies.
Yeah, I'm sure that ghost writer knows first hand how shady and what a liar Harry is, he needs to keep the receipts because Harry could sue him saying he never said whatever was published in the book.
We don't know that.
He'd be a fool not to. Even as screenshots. Which is what I do though with modern software that's risky, unless kept on a pen drive in a secure bank vault. He must have shared some of his evidence provided by Harry with the publisher's legal team. The legal team would also want proof maintained I expect, in case there was a legal challenge. You can't imagine Bowers not having evidence in reserve for backing up his books. The other thing about all this. I call b/s on 130 hours to search the 35,000 emails, if the result was only a few relevant ones to the case. I can write a script in a minute that searches emails and grades results - if I was still a professional in IT, I'd keep those scripts in my toolbox ready to add key words or phrases. Even my iMac will search my 10,000 photos/screenshots etc for relevant terms or words and give you results in seconds. Discovery is a big thing in the US. Dedicated software exists and I imagine any law firm worth their salt that deals with prestigious clients has specialists on tap or end of a phone to assist.
The court is calling his bluff. Kudos!
So he said he couldnt sue in the time frame because he wasnt aware - whereas the rest of the palace was aware? And he did become aware during the time of writing Spare so what was that moment he became aware and what was the trigger. Potentially Moehringer can get on stand. Sounds like H doesnt communicate well with his lawyers - the client from hell. Interesting!
On brand for Harry
Why is the Ghost writer not a witness?
I suspect that NGN wants to avoid dragging JRM into the case because heâs located in the US (harder to get him to participate, but not impossible) and that he might conveniently forget certain details.
Nothing is kept on servers with Signal, which is the whole point. It's encrypted end to end then self deletes.
Nothing in his whine fest wasnât predictable. The standard grievances from a weak, insufferable, spoiled little boy. đŠ didnât need the Daily Mail to leak it to me.
This one is regarding The Sun (NGN) not the Mail (edit: see below comments). My understanding of it is that NGN is saying that because of what Harry is alleging happened many years ago, the lawsuit was filed way too late thus should be dismissed. Harry's lawyer has claimed that it should not be dismissed because H didn't know stuff then that he has found out more recently. But that contradicts claims he made in Spare that he *did* know about what he alleged several years ago, but the palace wouldn't allow him to sue back then. So NGN is requesting to see texts/emails H had with the palace + w/ his ghostwriter, but they have all been erased/destroyed.
He has already published his excuses in his book. His memory is allegedly his memory and curates as it chooses, and there is just as much truth in his memories as in âso-called objective factsâ - even if he remembers the same occasion in two entirely different and conflicting ways, neither of which align with the objective facts everyone else remembers.
Then he forfeits because he's a unreliable witness.
We can hope, but Meghan got away with her âOops, I forgotâ excuse.
Which was an absolute disgrace as her lies were widespread and deliberate.
Henry is too stupid to understand that in a court case objective facts are relied on rather than curated memories!
In reality, it also refers to the Mail. The Mail is also sued for the same reasons, in the same period of time. The Mirror couldn't escape because the Mirror partly compensated Harry for what happened to the News of the World. But Harry now finds himself with The Sun and the Mail, which had a less active role than the News, so if The Sun manages to get the case barred, the Mail has a chance of achieving the same.
I really donât like The Scum/Sun newspaper, but in this instance I hope they win. H needs to learn a lesson about not always getting his own way from someone other than the government or BRF.
Never thought Iâd see the day that I wanted a *Sun* victory. đŁ Yet, here we are.
Same. That's how disgusting Harry is - worse than The Sun! Jeez mate you've sunk below the gutter.
......and getting their money back that they paid H. Sucks to be a liar, aye, Aich?
Ah. Ok will edit.
But if the sun can prove that he knew, his DM case will be reviewed for sure.
He's just being a spoiled brat, as usual. đ And also, by tampering with the evidence, he's trying to silence people again.
No, he's trying to pretend he hasn't known about the phone hacking since 2011 - which is what his entire case/s were based upon - the fact that he didn't know until recently. The little liar with his pants on fire has just been caught out, and I hope his other court cases get another look at too!
So even if Hâs emails are deleted from back in the day, I am sure the RF have emails which show H was informed. I expect they avoid providing anything here unless specifically asked.
Even back then, this numpty didnât want a quiet settlement. He wanted a huge victim pantomime. Heâs an irredeemable clown, and mistakes it for substance.
Great suggestion! He's been lying all along as is the MM way to handle things. Obviously! imo
How can he claim that he didn't know, when William sued over the same matter and said that Harry was hacked too?
To my understanding, Harry is missing a brain cell or the whole brain. That's a crime in itself.
Genetic pain. I curated that.
đ đÂ
Meghan Markle should have really slipped into David Sherborneâs DMs. Stupid cow. Heâs making more out of Haz than sheâll ever see.
đ And she would have met her (schemer) match.
And they could share tanning products
Methinks this is how Harry got by all his life. he lied, he threw tantrums, he gaslighted his family and they gave in to him-every single time. Especially the late Queen-who also gave in to Andrew. Like they say in America-there is a new sherriff in town-new King. For the first time, the bRF is not catering to him and taking care of his messes and making him appear as a nice , fun loving Prince. He is doing what he has always done-just with everyone else-now that the bRF won't speak or take care of his messes. And it is backfiring spectacularly.
HMTLQ was an incredible woman, but from everything Iâve read, one of the consistencies about her was that she did not handle conflict well. (My husband is like this.) Charles was cut from the same cloth, but his first marriage is likely to have changed him.
Charles has happily engaged in conflict most of his life with vested interests in areas such as architectural heritage, sustainable farming and environmental protection. I donât think anyone could argue that he was conflict-averse. He suffered media scolding and public mockery for his determination to stand up for what he believed was right, however unpopular that was with the establishment. I donât think it is about avoiding conflict out of fear, but like his mother, he places a high value on respect, loyalty, trust, and keeping your word once given. In their world, there is an expectation that private disputes are resolved in a civilised way between people acting rationally and respectfully. Once a compromise or an agreement is reached, there is an expectation that both sides will adhere to it and that one side wonât then try to stab the other in the back. Perhaps that is an attitude born out of the long and bloody history of the monarchy when family members actually did regularly kill their rivals and negotiated truces were a survival mechanism. Possibly before Meghan, Harry would have also respected this creed, but as far as she is concerned, there is no such thing as win-win. In her world-view, âgood guys finish lastâ and winning means that one side (hers) gets everything they wanted and everyone else needs to lose. She was never going to honour any agreement that did not give her everything she demanded, no matter how objectively reasonable and fair that agreement may have been.
Yes, it was PPâs role to âhandle the familyâ. After he retired things started to slide. Iâd like to think MM would never have had a chance when he was on top of his game and before he passed away
She also picked strange favourites, ie Andrew and Harry.
I think the Queen tried to make each of her grandchildren feel like her favourite.
And only a certain type would blow their own trumpet about being the "favourite".
You can imagine him telling his lawyers he has all the evidence needed for this case and thenâŠcrickets⊠where is the evidence
The RF swept so much dirt under the rug you could trip over the bulge. A lot of what came out in Spare, by his own dumb admission, I am sure was hushed up. His brutish behavor towards the boarding school matron, or having sex behind a pub with a girl who amounted to a member of the staff, for example.
GOOD
I 100% believe this đŻ
Basically the written texts will prove that Harry knew about the Levinson Enquiry. Which brings it back to being past the date these charges could be brought.
Yes⊠the judge is attempting to determine if Harry made reasonable attempts to seek justice within the timeframe. The Sun NGN says that they would like to see Harry emails to his private secretary (I forget the name now). Harry says, I have nothing pre2016 (Meghan was on the scene but this point). The Sun say⊠well lets see initial manuscripts of Spare outlining this time period⊠Harry has destroyed the early copies
Itâs a joke as H lived with William while this was going on. But it canât keep being ignored. And the knock on effect with Sherbourne and Shillings is a bonus
Seriously? What an idiot! Is there any possibility that W could be subpoenaed? Itâs not believable that they didnât talk about it.
LOL, maybe William has been sending them information on the sly! Wouldn't that be the best thing ever?
Yes it would!
Isnât Harryâs argument that he *knew* but was prevented by the Palace from suing?
He apparently blames everyone rather than accept any responsibility. His girlfriend was hacked
Itâs a different excuse each time: secret deal behind his back, prevented from suing. My understanding is he was fully informed every step of the way but not interested.
He was jointly suing with William at one stage, but stopped because he thought the process was too slow.
Sorry, but âmy daddy/grandma didnât want that I sue themâ canât be seen as a serious argument?
I think it was more, âMy Evil Brother Willy and his minions told me not to sue, but he settled for more money than I was offered.â (Never mind that he donated that money to Invictus.)
Clive Allerton? Something like that.
No, Clive Alderton is his father's private secretary. It never was Harry's.
Clive Alderton
Lol I stay confused about wth Harry's doing. It rarely makes any sense.Â
I just learned a new word: lolcow.
Looked it up and đ€Łđ€Łđ€Łđ€Łđ€Ł
That is fantastic!
Sums up this pair perfectly.
What happened was heinous. Not one should be hacked like that, but they had their day in court. They settled, the settlment was paid out, and spent! Im no friend of the skeezy side of the media, but this is ridiculous. I wonder if theyre using this case to set a legal precendent. The law depends heavily on this principle, sometimes it feels like cases are allowed to run their course despite obvious grounds for dismissal... I wonder if this is one of those. Pure speculation.
Harry and Hugh Grant wanted that, to set a legal precedent. They wanted to transform the press, and all that stuff. But Grant realized that his battle was going to cost him 10 million pounds so he dropped out. Not Harry, but his case is not on good footing at all.
Theyâre behind the game. The UK press was transformed in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry (2011-12). It may still have some sleazy operators (Meghan should know - thatâs what she relies on to publish her leaks) but it is radically different from what it was like before the Leveson Inquiry. Harry is dreaming about being a dragon-slayer in a battle where the dragon has already been vanquished and tamed, and everyone has gone home.
Yes - this, exactly.
Leveson changed everything about UK Press practices. Haz is trying to revive decades-old grievances that no longer apply for his own self-glorification, and âŠ*security*. Everything he does is an exercise in masturbatory rage at his inadequacies.
It's a classic example of the proverb, "Two wrongs don't make a right" but the current environment encourages people like Harry to believe that , "Payback is paramount". It's a scorched earth attitude .
Question for those familiar with the law and titles. If he is caught with lying to the UK courts, destroying evidence, could Parliament have a case to remove titles? Megsy was still protected when she was called out (which I hope those people involved are kicking themselves). Behavior unbecoming of a royal? Title holder? Especially because it was a gift, not a hereditary title. I could just be over analyzing.
You need a conviction for high treason in order to remove titles.
Hereâs Saturdayâs Sun from the paper itself https://preview.redd.it/sx0dbyhgs89d1.jpeg?width=2162&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f31e8c4e5105f252e98dd818d1d01f4823bafccf
That's pretty damaging, and covered so extensively by everyone. Him and the wife will be seething.
It was deleted to protect âhighly sensitive information.â As if Harry had the nuclear codes đđ€Łđđ€Ł these loons, I just canât
One of the issues in the case, IIRC, was how long after the alleged hacking incidents the lawsuit was filed. If I was accused of doing something on this night 20 years ago, I would have trouble proving where I was after 20 years. Itâs why statutes of limitations exist. Harry had to claim he wasnât fully aware of the hacking scandal at the time it was daily news, because if he knew about it then, he should have filed suit sooner. Itâs possible that something in an early draft of his book or messages sent to the ghostwriter could reveal that he was aware sooner than he now claims. But the early drafts and messages have all disappeared, according to his legal team. The paperâs legal team doesnât fully buy into his theory (itâs their job to fight however they can in court) and want an explanation for why potentially relevant information that was also crucial to writing his book has disappeared. ETA: itâs probably not a crime, unless it can be shown he intentionally hid the information or deleted it specifically to avoid having it show up in court. Iâm not a lawyer, or a Brit, so I could easily be wrong.
It depends on the crimes. Because if you are accused of having killed someone and you have been free for 20 years, but now you are accused of being guilty, in many countries there is no statute of limitations for that situation. In this case of piracy, the statute of limitations does not run from when the incident occurred, it runs from when you found out. If your phone was hacked 20 years ago, but you found out today, you have until 2029 to sue. 5 years, general rule of prescription. How you prove that this happened is another story, but the rule is that from the moment you find out about the occurrence of the event is when the statute of limitations begins. Harry has not strictly speaking committed a crime. He has not committed it because they are delivering documents, nothing more. The judge has not yet considered which of all the documents will actually be considered evidence. Be careful, proof is not everything you provide, but everything that is related to the substantial, relevant and controversial fact. A document in which Harry speaks ill of William is not evidence, it is only evidence if William had told Harry "Harry, my lawyer will contact you to sue News of the World" and that was a message from 2011. Harry has not committed a crime, although he is doing really irregular things.
Can the case be thrown out / dismissed if no evidence provided ? Could be very costly as he will have to pay both sides costs if is deemed as wasting everyoneâs time and money. Could this case bankrupt him?
Has the ghostwriter been questioned? If I were him, I would have saved everything! Harry is known for being a lying prick. I would have saved everything to cover my own ass.
True. Harry may have deleted the emails but not the ghost writer. This is really a stupid fact of the situation not being mentioned.
Yes.
If there was an expectation that that folly of a memoir was going to be released as a paperback (which all parties likely believed at the time) no one would delete the pertinent information.
It was intentional. Who would throw away their very first manuscript?
Of course he intentionally destroyed it. Whatâs in those will destroy HIM. And you can absolutely go to jail/prison for this. Itâs a very serious crime.
Wasn't he interviewed about it? Is that not proof he knew of it? His entire life is a lie SMH...
It's because of his book Spare. Their private conversations were all recorded. Harry has copies of the recordings. The ghostwriter is being asked about these recording that he gave to Harry, which would be full of dates and times. Ghostwriter is not lying to lawyers. Royal Rouge just did a live about this last night.
Nutmeg has already gotten away with committing perjury. Maybe Harry can just say he forgot tooÂ
I'm a bit confused too it's hard to know which lawsuit is which.  What I don't understand is is Harry trying to say that the institution banned him from suing during the time frame?  I don't see how they could have actually banned him. I think they strongly advised him not to sue but presumably he would have had to sign something if he was being included in a 'secret' deal. Is he claiming that the institution forged his signature or did he sign because he thought it was the right thing to do at the time but has now 'forgotten' or didn't understand what he was signing? The institution did not stop Meghan from suing for copyright wrt he letter to her father. They were still in the fold when they launched the case against the daily mail. I'm wondering if he's just decided that he feels he was prevented and that's all the evidence he requires.
Settling the case at the time didnât give Haz the hero headlines he craves.
Can we the public, sue Harry for being mind numbingly stupid and subjecting us to this shit show? Someone needs to start throwing tomatoes at these two idiots, they just don't learn...
We should sue them for 'emotional distress' for calling us racists and trying to destabilise our monarchy (and therefore, our country).
Iâm still confused! How would the messages between H and the ghostwriter prove anything? I get it if Harry wrote âso then in 2013 I found out everything about the hacking but donât put that in the book because Iâm still suing themâ. But surely the messages arenât going to reference how much H knew and when? Sorry for being dense!Â
He only needed to write about him being the victim of media hacking and how it made him feel in 2013. The point is that Harry denies knowledge prior to 2019. Ideal for NGN would be, if Harry told the ghostwriter to scrap a chapter because his lawyers told him so. But later isn't necessary.
Both sides need to enter all evidence prior to the trial. If NEW evidence comes, they need to show the judge how they just found out the evidence. Otherwise, they have an advantage over the other side, because the other side now has only a little time to prepare but the side that showed the new evidence has had longer (if they lied and they really DID know before). So, Harry and his lawyers are pretending they JUST found out this new evidence. However, in a deleted draft of Spare, it shows he knew back in 2013, meaning that the statute of limitations is out on it; he can't give the excuse, "Oh I just found out."
Clearly, Harry really didn't get as many sausages as William! Harry did not get enough protein to his growing brain, and the last several years are clear evidence that his brain is stunted.
Amazing breakdown of harry's legal quagmire here. Thank you and I hope they throw the book at this vexatious twit and his helpers. Speaking of which, Vintage Read has just posted a really interesting interview with Andrew Lownie on the RF's (or their guardians') habit of destroying documents even when supposedly accessible to the public. Obviously, this little foible is not only the prerogative of the RF, the UK government and other countries do it too but maybe that's why harry thinks he can get away with it. I do hope the judge doesn't buckle under pressure.